I just now dug up an older article from Zero Hedge that is more relevant today than ever because it shows that the US was one of the supporters of ISIS and it also contains confessions of the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency) that they support the same pro-terrorist policies that Trump is now putting in place – even as he pretends to oppose ISIS. The fact is, anyone opposed to Assad wants Syria to be controlled by US-supported terrorists. Ask any Syrian Christian.

“Safe havens” are suggested in areas conquered by Islamic insurgents along the lines of the Libyan model (which translates to so-called no-fly zones as a first act of ‘humanitarian war’; see 7.B.)

One of the first foreign policy ideas floated by Trump was “safe zones” ie, no-fly zones. This is the US’s first step to ousting a national leader, as the US did with Ghadaffi, using extreme violence. Trump was preparing the way for removing Assad, the only Syrian leader sincerely fighting ISIS and Al-Qaeda in Syria. I keep getting infantile emails trying to show that Trump really wants peace but that the deep state is standing in his way.

However, this notion is contradicted by things he said even during his campaign. For ex, while he promised not to interfere in Syria, he also stressed repeatedly that the US must build up its armed forces so that “no one will ever mess with us again.” But there were only 2 countries that had superpower-grade military forces that would require more US military might and they were Russia and China. There would not have been any need to build up to take on, say, Iran or N Korea. Therefore, he was most likely thinking about Russia in Syria. To him, despite his intention to be friendly with Russia, that country was “messing with” the US by bombing “our” terrorists in Syria and thereby protecting Assad. He thought that, because of his popularity among patriots, he could get away with this.

He also said in his speech before AIPAC in 2016:

“When I’m president, I will adopt a strategy that focuses on three things when it comes to Iran. First, we will stand up to Iran’s aggressive push to destabilize and dominate the region.”

Woa! Iran, via its army and Hezbollah (declared a terror group by the Neocon Establishment, hoping you were not very smart), was fighting terror in Syria. Only a member of the Deep State establishment – or a deeply disturbed person – would call that “destabilizing the region.” It is a contradiction in terms to say that fighting Al-Qaeda – the group that killed 3000 of us on 9-11 2001 – plus ISIS is a destabilizing action. Only rank Neocons say this. Trump was a Neocon at heart even then and we should have seen that. The goal is a confrontation with Russia, which the article below says the US hoped to be friends with while ousting Assad. Indeed Trump’s secretary of state Rex Tillerson naively tried in his visit to Moscow to persuade the leadership there to back away from Assad based on the groundless accusation that Assad had ordered the use of Sarin gas against his own people at Khan Sheikhoun. It failed then (whereupon Israel assumed its role as proxy) and will always fail. Anyone who knows Putin’s modus operandi knows he is determined to see the US-dominated unipolar world give way to a more fairly distributed power balance, ie, the multipolar world where each nation asserts its sovereign right to self-determination without consulting Washington.

He also said during his campaign that Edward Snowden should be jailed, even though this whistleblower is popular among conservatives, libertarians and many other patriots including Trump supporters, and Snowden’s revelations were helpful in getting Trump elected. Only a sympathizer with the Deep State would rail so bitterly against Snowden. Trump knew which of our buttons to press but his heart was never with us and he was never truly anti-Establishment.

Ominously, in the above-referenced campaign speech to AIPAC, Trump repeated the lie that Iran is the biggest state sponsor of terror – even though Shiite Iran not only has never supported the SUNNI terrorists of Taliban, Al-Qaeda or ISIS and is in fact fighting the latter two in Syria that the US pretends to be fighting. (let me remind you again: it would be theologically impossible for a Shiite country like Iran to support the 100% Sunni terror (ISIS, Al-Qaeda and offshoots such as Al-Nusra). The truth is that the US and Saudi Arabia have always been the biggest terror supporters by far, and the US’s shameful role is confirmed by the below linked article. Trump’s pronouncements sounded like war rhetoric even then, and today we are seeing the anti-Syrian policies expressed early in his presidency.

Keen observers noted these ominous signs, but many supported Trump to prevent Hillary from being elected. Now it is no longer at all clear which of these 2 is the more warlike or the more sympathetic to the Establishment.

So please stop misleading the public into believing that Trump has good intentions but is being thwarted by the Democrats or the Neocons. He himself talked like a Neocon in his campaign. The argument that Trump wants peace but is being hamstrung is the same kind of argument used by Bush supporters to excuse his missteps.

“Having watched our military policies in action, with the msm sound muted, I have come to an unshakable conviction: there is no hope that the anti-Christian and anti-American leadership of the GOP and Democratic Party in Washington will loosen its grip on power or change its mind and stop supporting terror. No hope whatsoever. If you think there is, you are deluded and contributing to the success of evil. At some point, I believe our military will realize that they are literally fighting a false flag war to destroy America. There is no other way to see it or say it.”

The above linked articles show I was right.

PS:

After sending some of you the wrong link yesterday, I sent you a good link to my article on Putin adviser Sergey Glazyev’s remarks on the collapse of the dollar as a means of eliminating US aggression. The correct link worked yesterday but was gone this a.m. Not to fear. It is now restored. Seems there was some work in progress last night that blocked it temporarily.

I saw this in an online Russian language newspaper to which I subscribe (link at bottom). I was unable to find an English language report, so I decided to send you a translation.

This is not exactly my own translation. It is only my edited version of a rather good google translate rendition. You can use google translate to read the rest if you want. Mind you, some of the sentences were badly rendered and would have been misleading without my edit, but my hat is generally off to Google on their excellent software.

Don Hank

Glazyev: US aggression can be stopped only by ditching the dollar

Sergey Glazyev. Photo: expert.ru

The only way to stop the US aggression is to get rid of dollar dependence. This was announced today, April 21, by presidential adviser Sergei Glazyev on the margins of the Yalta International Economic Forum (YAEF).

“The more aggression from Americans, the sooner they will bring matters to the final dollar collapse, because the only way for victims of American aggression to stop this aggression is to get rid of the dollar. As soon as Russia and China defeat the dollar, US military power will come to an end,” he said.

At the same time, commenting on the policies of the new US president, Glazyev noted that Donald Trump acts in accordance with the expectations of the American ruling elite.” I had no illusions that he would change politics. First, American aggressiveness in the world is due to the desire to preserve American hegemony in a situation where they have already lost leadership to China in terms of the economy. In addition to the military cudgel, the US has no other ways to get everyone to use the dollar. Therefore, they are conducting a hybrid war with the whole world in order to unload the burden of their debts onto other countries, to keep everyone in the dollar and to weaken those territories that they do not control,” Glazyev said.

According to him, “in this light, anti-Russian hysteria and growing Russophobia are a long-term factor associated with the specific interests of the American ruling elite.” “Objectively, they are conducting the global hybrid war, and subjectively this war is directed against us. And then the war, as is always the case when the global leader is changed, is waged for control over the periphery. During the First and Second World War, England played the role of the provocateur to preserve world leadership. Now America is doing the same. Trump is the spokesman for these interests,” concluded Glazyev.

As reported by EADaily, the third Yalta International Economic Forum is taking place in Crimea from April 20 to 22, at which no less than 1500 people have arrived – approximately 400 participants more than a year ago. One of the most important achievements of the organizers of the forum was the expansion of international participation – delegates from 46 countries are taking part in the YIEF. This is 20 more than a year ago.

On this Easter Sunday morning, even as our government prepares for war against the Damascus government, I could not help but remember that it was Paul who, in his early persona as Saul of Tarsus, was stopped short on his march to Damascus to persecute the early Christians. We are Saul on the road to Damascus and the Lord is Jesus. Nothing has changed. The story has been ongoing for 2 millennia.

The Damascus Road: Saul Converted (Acts 9)

9 Then Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest 2 and asked letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, so that if he found any who were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.

3 As he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shone around him from heaven. 4 Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?”

5 And he said, “Who are You, Lord?”

Then the Lord said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.[a] It is hard for you to kick against the goads.”

6 So he, trembling and astonished, said, “Lord, what do You want me to do?”

Then the Lord said to him, “Arise and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”

7 And the men who journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice but seeing no one. 8 Then Saul arose from the ground, and when his eyes were opened he saw no one. But they led him by the hand and brought him into Damascus. 9 And he was three days without sight, and neither ate nor drank.

The Satanic States of America (SSA), which, like Jerusalem in the story above, imagines itself to be a moral authority, is now headed like Saul to Damascus, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, to take out President Bashar al-Assad, the only man standing between the US-funded terrorists and the Christian population that has so far escaped the murderous onslaught of Washington, DC. Like Saul, before he became Paul, we are on the road to Damascus, Syria, to persecute and kill Christians.

What will the Lord do now? Have faith, my friends. It is all we have now and it is sufficient.

I want to take this opportunity to wish all our Orthodox brothers and sisters around the world, both those in the region where Christianity was born and those in the land that stands between persecuted Christians and the Satanic States of America, a blessed Resurrection Day!

I was in a Coptic Egyptian church in Lancaster County, PA, several decades ago when the presiding priest had the congregants stand at the end of the service, shake hands with each other and say to each other: He is risen!

McCain and Graham are senators, not country dictators, and any of their opinions require support by a majority of Senators to lead to actions. Further, you may disagree with their views on strategy and tactics, but both are veterans with views that should at least be considered.

But there the Breitbart linked above reports on McCain and supports the accusations that McCain has supported terrorists and terrorist sympathizers:

QUOTE:

Patrick Poole, an esteemed national security reporter and expert on radical Islam for PJ Media, has reported that the Free Syrian Army’s commanders have admitted in public to working alongside ISIS. [McCain has supported the Free Syrian Army—Don Hank]

Earlier JB had said that the only sites that asserted that McCain had met with terrorists were fake news sites.

The problem for JB and other dogs wagged by the tail in the White House is that Breitbart has been embraced by Trump. So, since Trump has named a Breitbart operative to his inner circle, pretending this is fake news is claiming that Trump has been duped.

Another quote:

Rogers–McCain’s communications director–went on the record to multiple media outlets to say he didn’t know who he was meeting with.

So McCain didn’t know these fighters that he supported wholeheartedly with your cash but he insists that they were not members of terrorist groups. Sure. Well, then, if he didn’t know them, he could naturally vouch for their not being terrorists, couldn’t he?

So my question for JB and his ilk is: in view of the above, why should McCain’s views “be considered,” even though he is a veteran – particularly since most veterans don’t trust McCain. After all, they are veterans too and should their views not be considered?

Here I quote from the article linked to by JB:

Tuesday’s chemical attack that killed at least 86 people, including 27 children, is the latest in a series of atrocities linked to the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad.

“Linked to” is pregnant with meaning. Yet it means little, because JB apparently has not asked himself WHO did the “linking.” The answer to that question is: the same people who linked Trump to the Kremlin and who linked Russia to a document leak that was said, by Craig Murray, the leaker to Wikileaks, to have come from a disgruntled Bernie Sanders voter. This linker was the CIA and its puppets, about 17 “intelligence” agencies in all, none of whom would dare to disagree with their lying boss. Why do I call the CIA a liar? Because this same Wikileaks exposed another info dump showing that the CIA has software that can simulate a Russian “hack” even when there is no hack. This special software inserts Russian-looking code into documents and pretends they are Russian hacks. But of course, the CIA said they never use this software. And many Trump bots believe this rot now that Trump sides with these characters. Voters sided with Trump for the right reasons but are now mesmerized by his personality and following him for the wrong reasons.

The United Nations previously accused his government of committing war crimes against the Syrian people during a brutal six-year-long civil war that continues without end.

But what JB and others forgot is that the US-backed Iraqi forces were also accused of horrific crimes, so if Assad is to be tried for crimes, how about the US and its ally? Oh dear, we aren’t supposed to think like this, are we JB?

Here are other actions Assad has been accused of taking that have triggered global condemnation:

Chemical weapons

In 2013, Assad’s military launched a nerve gas attack in the suburbs of Damascus that killed hundreds of people.

On December 13, [2013] UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon signed identical letters to the UN General Assembly and Security Council, stating:

“I have the honour to convey herewith the final report of the United Nations Mission to investigate allegations of the use of chemical weapons in the Syrian Arab Republic”

The letter of transmittal was signed by Professor Ake Sellstrom, Head of Mission, and Dr. Maurizio Barbeschi, signing for the WHO component.

On page 21 of this 85 page report is stated:

“Khan al Asal, 19 March 2013: 111. The United Nations Mission collected credible information that corroborates the allegations that chemical weapons were used in Khan al Asal on 19 March 2013 against soldiers and civilians.”

Page 22:

“Jobar, 24 August 2013: 113. The United Nations Mission collected evidence consistent with the probable use of chemical weapons in Jobar on 24 August on a relatively small scale against soldiers…”

Emphasis mine. No rational person would suggest that Assad would kill his own soldiers. So where did these chemical weapons come from? Read on.

Page 114, this assessment is based on the following:

According to Seymour Hersh, December 19 (published in The London Review of Books),

“Already by late May, the senior (US) intelligence consultant told me, the CIA had briefed the Obama administration on al-Nusra and its work with sarin, and had sent alarming reports that another Sunni fundamentalist group active in Syria, al-Qaida in Iraq (AQI), also understood the science of producing sarin. At the time, al-Nusra was operating in areas close to Damascus, including Eastern Ghouta. An intelligence document issued in mid-summer dealt extensively with Ziyaad Tarriq Ahmed, a chemical weapons expert formerly of the Iraqi military, who was said to have moved into Syria and to be operating in Eastern Ghouta. The consultant told me that Tariq had been identified ‘as an al-Nusra guy with a track record of making mustard gas in Iraq and someone who is implicated in making and using sarin.’ He is regarded as a high-profile target by the American military.”

This would support the Russian Ambassador’s claim, following the Security Council consultations of December 17, 2013 that: “Why would the Syrian government use chemical weapons on August 21? To cross the red line drawn by Washington and invite a missile strike upon itself? Why would the opposition use chemical weapons? Exactly because of the red line. To provoke foreign military intervention in the Syrian conflict…The Russian team’s analysis concluded that ‘home-made’ sarin was used near Aleppo on March 19. It stated that the Sarin was likely delivered by a crudely made missile. The team also named the particular opposition group most likely behind the attack. At the time, the Syrian government immediately requested an international investigation of the March 19 incident, but then the United Kingdom and France all of a sudden recalled a Homs case, that had not bothered them for 3 preceding months, while the US started insisting on the need to investigate ‘all incidents.’ Why did those who accused the Syrian government of this act do their utmost to derail or at least delay such investigation?” The dragging UN probe was interfered with by the tragic events in Ghouta on August 21. “As our experts concluded, sarin used on August 21 was of approximately the same type as the one used on March 19, though of a slightly better quality. It means that over a few months, opposition chemists somewhat improved the quality of their product.”

More from JB-linked article:

Under international pressure, he agreed to a plan to destroy his chemical weapons stockpiles. Since then, however, his regime has been linked[again, by whom? Don] to attacks using chlorine, which is more easily made from industrial sources. Most countries ban the storage or use of chemical weapons. Nerve gas is suspected in this week’s attack.

Barrel bombs

Assad’s military has regularly used these improvised explosives against rebels. But the regime has used them in cities where their destruction is indiscriminate. The bombs are packed with explosives and shrapnel that cause wide areas of damage and commonly are dropped from helicopters. The Syrian Network for Human Rights said in a report that the Syrian regime helicopters dropped nearly 13,000 barrel bombs in 2016, killing hundreds of civilians, including children.

The implication of the above is that US bombs do not kill civilians, but in fact, the US is accused by the British monitoring group Airwars of killiing 1500 civilians in March alone.

was produced by a group that says it wants to improve US-Russian relations. Start at minute 30 and listen to this man’s suggestions for improving US-Russian relations.

Then please send me your thoughts on the following:

In your opinion, does this man have a sensible idea for how to improve Russian-US relations?

Does he understand Putin, his philosophy and his MO? That is, does he have reasonable expectations for Putin based on what you know about Putin? (I am assuming most of you have read my articles on Putin and Russia here, here, here, here and elsewhere. If not, it would be good to read some of this before responding).

Keep in mind that the group that posted this video has the avowed goal of making Russians and Americans understand each other. Earlier in the video the speaker says he does not like Putin. Do you think the Russian people will sympathize with this man because they too have misgivings about Putin or do you think Russians generally like Putin and will be put off?

I will appreciate your taking the time to respond to at least part of this.

We have various groups that say they want to end war. I wanted you to see what some of these groups are doing so that you can assess their work and their approaches to the problem they are attempting to solve.

I would prefer if you would take the time to provide your answer below at the forum, but you may also write me directly. Thank you!

Don Hank

Now back to today’s business:

Our fear is killing us:

by Don Hank

Let me start off with an anecdote. Today I was walking in our neighborhood with my wife when a young dog, an obviously very playful and gentle female, came up to us and started rearing up and putting its paws on our legs to be petted. I petted its head and fell in love with it right away. But my wife started getting nervous and declared “I’m afraid it will bite us.” What was the source of her irrational fear? She had heard the old myth that if an animal smells your fear, it will attack you. Try as I might, I could not calm her or convince her that this myth does not apply to gentle dogs that do not bite.

This encounter with the gentle dog reminded me of Westerners and their irrational fear of Russia, Assad, Iran, all far-away places that we are supposed to fear and hate and that we are trying to destroy because of the fear ginned up daily by the press and the political class.

The following email from our friend JB is a clue as to why Trump is even more dangerous than GW Bush.

My email correspondent JB, a staunch fiscal conservative with a Master’s from a prestigious university, would agree that the msm are not reliable. But now Trump is president, and Trump is in agreement with the same msm that falsely accused him of being a Kremlin spy, so his followers now suddenly believe the press. This kind of thinking would seem silly to any unbiased rational person. But many Americans do not question the leaders we have chosen. To do so would be embarrassing and make us feel guilty. So we blindly let the tail wag the dog, and pray.

Why do we do this? In fact, both sides focus on their evidence, but this exchange with JB shows that evidence is not the issue here. The real issue is found in the fields of anthropology and mass psychology – that is, the mindset of the average American and what makes him tick.

The most solid evidence that the US citizen lets the tail wag the dog is the fact that after Donald Trump sided 100% with the Establishment, the US people kept siding with him thinking that they were being anti-Establishment. In fact they were now being Trump Establishment, of course. No different from the run-of-the-mill Establishment.
They were in fact suffering from a bad case of group-think, and what they believed to be thought processes were nothing more nor less than a monkey-see-monkey-do slave mentality. They were looking over their shoulders to see what other “anti-Establishment” people were doing and saying, and they were imitating them as best they could – for warmth, the same reason cows huddle together in the winter time. For the most part, they simply let Trump do the leading and switched off their brains. After all, they shallowly reasoned – if it could be called reasoning – since Trump has proven himself as the anti-Establishment leader, then we can trust him (OMG!). Yet Trump had never been a political leader before he began siding with the Establishment that he claimed to oppose. He had been a candidate. Candidates are not leaders. They are just basically car salesmen, some selling decent cars, some selling lemons. They become leaders only once they assume the presidency. But once Trump entered the White House, he almost immediately switched sides and let the Neocon / Neoliberal Establishment lead HIM. Now he is clearly selling lemons and the public is buying them without question.

Tragically, very few noticed this, and aside from a few bloggers like myself, who are not ambitious to land important positions in msm or politics, no one has any interest in exposing the ugly reality. Only by following and supporting a powerful movement can an activist succeed in the West-osphere In fact, let me tell you something personal.

Two writers and activists, who purport to be in favor of getting along with the Russians recently contacted me and complimented me on my work. But I noted that they only praised me for forwarding the work of other authors, never my own personal writing. I admit, I am utterly incendiary and no one knows what to do with me (because, while my writing often stings, I carefully document everything I say). Few up and coming Western activists or authors would dare quote me (though I often see the ideas expressed at my humble web site finding their way into their writings). Their narrative is that I am too pro-Russian, and on top of that, pro-Assad and, —gasp!—pro-Iran! But our president has commanded us to hate and fear Iran. So I am dangerously out of step and for now they won’t touch me. Eventually, they will cautiously let me know I was right, but only after the current administration has led them over the cliff and it becomes fashionable to disagree with Trump.

Therefore, the legions who are currently following Trump into WW III would not dare express support for my opinions. Not yet.

But who loses here? Is a warmonger who fails to see the risk of provoking a nuclear power not the real danger and not a little guy with no skin in the game who is only trying to warn America of a grave danger?

I guess WW III is no big deal. I have even had close friends tell me that human beings have no business trying to prevent wars using reason because – are you ready? – only God makes wars and only government “experts” are qualified to discuss war-related issues in detail. I kid you not. I have been told that by friends!

This commentary is a hard lesson in American anthropology. And this is one very important reason why more than 50% of Americans now agree with Trump’s attack on the Shayrat airbase, despite the fact that no investigation was conducted – or even called for – by the administration. We watched GW Bush do the same sort of thing in Iraq, we saw it fail catastrophically in the long run, and yet, it is the adrenaline rush, the emotion of the moment, and the desire to please powerful people who are in fact our enemy, that drives us. No rational considerations need apply. So what are the chances now of us shaking off our emotion-induced stupor and realizing that we are buying one more lemon from the car salesman-in-chief du jour? Does America stand a chance? Well, perhaps about as much chance as we have of the FED and Congress spontaneously ending deficit spending before we fall over the debt cliff. America – both official and private – is a creature of habit, and so far shows no sign whatsoever of abandoning ingrained deadly habits. It is my humble conclusion that any change in our thinking must come from outside the country. The US is not yet capable of governing itself.

“The Islamist group Jaysh al-Islam admitted to using chemical weapons against Kurdish militias in Aleppo. It also uses human shields and publishes execution videos – yet it has a delegation at the UN-backed Syria peace talks in Geneva.

“Jaysh al-Islam (Army of Islam), formerly known as Liwa al-Islam (Brigade of Islam), is a coalition of Salafist Islamist militant groups based in the Douma and Eastern Ghouta neighborhoods of the Syrian capital Damascus.”

[see links further below for confirmation of this RT report]

Salafist is another word for intolerant. Salafists among the opposition to Assad are invariably Wahhabists (a Sunni sect) and, accordingly, they do not tolerate other Sunnis and particularly, Shiites and Christians. Every member of ISIS and Al-Qaeda (under a variety of names) is a Wahahbist (and hence a Salafist, or rigid fundamentalist). The West wants these people in charge of Syria, at odds with the will of the Syrians, who want Assad to stay.

In other words, this opposition leader who approves of Trump’s attack on the Idlib airbase is the head of a group that has – in addition to other brutal offenses such as executing prisoners – actually gassed Kurds with chemical weapons, and yet has the gall to talk about “saving the world from the clutches of Assad,” who has been fighting terrorists for 6 years, ever since the US-backed Arab Spring in 2011.

Think about it: The leader of a group that has admitted to gassing civilians is now hypocritically supporting President Trump in his strike on Idlib, based on only an allegation, without awaiting the results of an investigation of said allegation.

Of course, the US government-media coalition, known for always telling the truth, keeps telling us that RT is a “propaganda arm” of the Kremlin, suggesting they can’t be trusted.

This is why I always cross check their data (I cannot recall other sources contradicting their facts, BTW). I found numerous sources confirming the above report on Jaysh al-Islam and its crimes. Below are a few of these sources.

kurdistan24.net confirms that Jaysh Al-Islam has admitted to chemical attacks on Kurds, and further:

“Jaysh al-Islam, which is killing the civilians in Sheikh Maqsoud, is included with the Syrian opposition delegation in the Geneva peace talks, while Kurds who are seeking peace and fighting terrorism are excluded from any talks related to the Syrian war.”

southfront.org, a multinational independent news group, also confirms that Jaysh Al-Islam has used chemical weapons.

In other news

According to Global Research the UN refutes the US version of chemical weapons attacks in Syria.

QUOTE:

Washington is Lying.

The Media is Lying.

Both Trump and Obama have blood on their hands. The Chemical Weapons Attack is being used as a “False Flag”, a pretext and a justification to wage an illegal war of aggression.

Konashenkov was quoted by Sputnik as saying a number of systems will be added to supplement the existing S-300s and S-400s now in place. Chief of these will be the Pantsir-S1.

“This system can detect and destroy any aircraft, helicopter, guided aerial bomb or enemy ballistic missile in a matter of seconds. In addition, the Pantsir-S1…is also designed to destroy ground targets, making it truly universal. The system combines anti-aircraft missiles and cannons, and there is no analogue…in the world today,” said Konashenkov.

The spokesman says the Pantsir-S would have saved the Idlib base:

“If the Syrians had had the Pantsir-S, the outrage of the [US] cruise missile attack on the Ash Sha’irat airbase would not have happened.”

UNDER TRUMP, U.S. MILITARY HAS ALLEGEDLY KILLED OVER 1,000 CIVILIANS IN IRAQ, SYRIA IN MARCH

QUOTE: U.S.-led coalition airstrikes in Iraq and Syria may have already killed 1,484 civilians in just Iraq and Syria this month alone, more than three times the number killed in President Barack Obama’s final full month in office

No? He wasn’t saddened and angered by those reports?

Oh, wait. It was an unconfirmed allegation of a chemical attack supposedly committed by Syrian President Bashar Assad, even though Assad had no motivation whatsoever for such an attack and there was no evidence to indict Assad. Indeed, following the bombing of a terrorist nest in the area in question, a Russian team discovered a lab in which terrorists had been preparing chemical weapons.

This ties in with a report that chemical weapons were used in Mosul, where the US was bombing. Oddly, that report got little press and no one in the world accused the US or its allies of facilitating the chemical attacks.

Despite the Russian report of this evidence of terrorist involvement in the chemical attack in Syria, no media outlet in the West was interested in the report. Almost in unison, the Western press condemned Assad, thereby clearing the path for Trump’s attack using WMDs known as Tomahawk missiles, which took the lives of heroic ISIS-fighting Syrian pilots, leaving precious children fatherless.

It is important to note that world leaders had called for an investigation into the allegations against Assad, as reported here.

Now a call for an investigation indicates that there is no unanimity as to the cause and perpetrators. Right? And a retaliatory action for something that is clearly not sufficiently investigated is rash and uncalled for, at least if we are to consider ourselves civilized.

Just think. Suppose a witness in court claimed he heard someone say a defendant killed someone. And the judge, before cross examination of the witnesses, before hearing the defendant and his lawyer, before hearing the forensic expert, immediately sentences the defendant to death for murder, even though the suspect had no motive for the murder and there was credible testimony to the effect that someone else who had a motive committed the crime. And this judge, when asked by reporters after the trial why he had not allowed the defendant to defend himself, replied: “I was afraid he’d get away with it. What would that have done to my reputation?”

This absurdity is essentially what his Honor judge Donald J. Trump did on Thursday April 6, 2017, sending 59 weapons of mass destruction to attack an air base in Syria from which heroic pilots and Russian advisors had been flying sorties against terrorists for over a year, risking their lives for the Syrian people and to rid the world of the scourges of civilization called ISIS, and Al-Qaeda and its metamorphoses – groups that Trump himself claimed to oppose. Because Judge Trump, based on no evidence but the opinion of US intel agencies that had falsely condemned him no less, based on false allegations, of being a Russian spy. Now tell me, Folks, did he really believe this intel or was this attack on the sovereign Syrian people something that he had planned perhaps during his campaign, even as he promised us he would not intervene in the Middle East?

Just how intelligent is our intel? Well, some years ago, someone “disappeared” trillions of dollars at the Pentagon, and our brilliant sleuths have not yet identified this person or group and no one can find the money. Yet, a few minutes after learning of a chemical attack in a region in which terrorists are known to use chemical weapons, these same leadersknow who committed the attack and it was not the terrorists.

It smells of GW Bush, and back on December 1 of last year, I warned you here of what I suspected was about to come.

Here’s the thing: Trump is a gambling man (after all, he used to build casinos). He gambled on you wanting an anti-Obama. But emails from my readers indicate that this is not quite all you wanted and that many of you will now wake up and stop the cheering.

You see, I remember many of my readers endorsing Trump because they figured Hillary was a warmonger but Trump, who had said he could get along with Putin, would bring about peace on earth, and in fact this image of Trump induced a lot of voters to switch affiliations, some because they feared a confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia.

But Trump may have fatally misjudged his voters. After all, what is anti-Obama to some is not anti-Obama to others. Like the stopped clock that tells the correct time twice a day, Obama did not always do the wrong thing. No one does. Now Obama had returned money that belonged to Iran and had been held in escrow in the US. To some, being anti-Obama would be getting tough on Iran. But softness on Iran was not Obama’s big sin. His big sin was failing to lift a pinky to stop ISIS back when that group was invading Syria and Iraq in broad daylight and its long rows of white machine gun-equipped Toyota pickups presented a perfect target. This inaction allowed the terrorists to infiltrate villages and mingle with civilians, enabling the terrorists to hold them hostage in deadly situations. Many voters were hoping Trump would brook no nonsense from ISIS but would cooperate with Russia to take down these terrorists.

But his choice of a Neocon cabinet did not fit this narrative and it cast doubt on his sincerity to fight the Establishment that had done nothing to stop terror.

In fact, Trump as president kept bad mouthing Iran even though Iran was doing a commendable job of fighting ISIS in Syria. He also told AIPAC that he would stand by Israel. Which is fine if all he meant was that he defended Israel’s right to exist and live in peace. But coinciding with this US attack, Israel is now asking for a buffer zone in Syria. Which is odd. Israel already occupies the Syrian Golan Heights. Many keen observers think they are just grabbing more elbow room, which is their MO.

Now if Americans just simply acquiesce to this illegal and irrational action on the part of the man they elected, he will, like Dubya after the Iraq war, most likely simply stay the course, believing that you support him. The most important mission of every American today is to show you do not support this attack, which provides assistance to ISIS. These terrorists are already feeling their oats and taking full advantage of the cover kindly provided by the administration, as described here.

SYRIA: SOMETHING IS NOT ADDING UP IN IDLIB CHEMICAL WEAPONS ATTACK

White Helmets [this group has already been identified as a fake, as detailed here and here] are handling the corpses of people without sufficient safety gear, most particularly with the masks…as well as no gloves… a doctor in a hospital full of victims of sarin gas has the time to tweet and make video calls.

SYRIA: IT’S WMD ALL OVER AGAIN. WHY DON’T YOU SEE IT?
Two points occur. One, the western power, by consorting with such people, demonstrate that their exaggerated disgust at the Assad government is selective and unreal. Two, they demonstrate that our continuing desire to be on good terms with Saudi Arabia lies beneath our whole foreign policy in this region. And which state loathes President Assad more than anyone? Why, Wahhabi Saudi Arabia, which despises Assad for his Alawite heresy, and hates him for his alliance with Shia Iran.

A friend alerted me to a NYT op-ed that is out of keeping with that outlet’s general viewpoint and correctly identifies the source of the problem.

QUOTE: What hardly any Israelis will consider, though, and virtually no influential voices in the West will publicly suggest, is that Israel — not Hezbollah in Lebanon, nor Hamas in Gaza, nor the government of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria — is provoking the next war. Counterintuitive though it may be to Israeli and most Western minds, Israel, not its militant Islamist or brutal Syrian enemies, is the aggressor in these border wars.

Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong. 1 Corinthians 16:13

I keep getting emails praising this or that Islam “expert” who rages against Islam per se and holds up Israel as a shining light in a world of darkness (see below). But these experts don’t mean Israel, they mean the war hawk Likud party which seeks to invade Iran to enlarge its elbow room, using false narratives of the “threat” posed by Tehran. Yet Likud does not equal Israel and for that matter, the Israel of today is not the Israel of antiquity that God blessed. God banished those Israelites from their land when they turned their backs on Him. Pray tell, in view of the fact that only a fraction of Israelis believe in the God of Abraham, when have they turned godly again? A while back I asked a “Zionist Christian” friend that question and never heard back from him.

Unfortunately, though, the vast majority of these people who “enlighten” us about Islam make no distinction between Sunni and Shia, and yet such distinction is one of the vital facts any real expert would know and teach. The reason for this is political. Every single ISIS member is SUNNI and belongs to the most violent and intolerant religious sect in the world, the SUNNI sect of Wahhabism, a product of the Saudi dictatorship to which Washington bows. Not just the Democrats. ALL of Washington.

EVERY single Al-Qaeda member, including Osama bin Laden, is also a SUNNI Wahhabist, and so is EVERY single Taliban member.

BTW, this is not to say that all Sunnis are dangerous or potentially so. Consider that Sunni-majority Indonesia has the highest Muslim population of any country, and yet we almost never hear of terror acts committed by Indonesians against Westerners (though Shia-Sunni rifts are common), and yet, most of them are Sunni. This is because modernist Islam (a moderate Islam heavily influenced by Islamic thinkers influenced in turn by the West) predominates there, where the government is generally secularist – just as the governments of Assad, Saddam Hussein and Ghadaffi are or were secularist, and terrorists, for example, are or were not tolerated. It is, of course, no coincidence that the West has opposed these secularists, paying obeisance to the Saudis and their zeal to spread Islam by the sword. No surprise. But no excuse either.

Despite the relative moderation of the Shiites compared to the Sunnis in the Middle East, as described above, for purely political reasons, it is de rigueur to claim that Shiite IRAN is the biggest terror supporter in the world.

To add to the utter absurdity of the official Western narrative, Iran is fighting ISIS in Syria. Of course, these same “enlighteners” regarding Islam never dare mention that Assad, the man we are supposed to hate, is also a Shiite, of the Alawite sect, or that the Alawites are by far the most tolerant and non-violent of all Muslims and are hated by the Saudis for it. The Western call to oust Assad is just a genuflection toward the tyrannical Saudis with whom the US is joined at the hip for reasons discussed in part here and here.

Anyone who tries to create the impression that Iran is a threat to civilization is simply caving to the Neocons who gave the world near-total chaos in the Middle East. No matter what the consequences, this myth must be broken. Nothing is more important. If anyone tries to sell you this swill, ask them to name ONE terror attack in Europe or the US that was perpetrated by Iranians or Hezbollah.

The notion that ALL MUSLIMS are evil and dangerous in fact plays into the narrative of the Neocons, who use this simplistic notion of a monolithic, heterogeneous Islam to wage war strictly against the SHIITES, precisely the branch of Islam that is fighting ISIS. After all, if All Muslims are equally dangerous and evil, then we have a mandate to destroy Iran and Assad as well, and that is exactly what they want you to believe. We often hear from our kindly, enlightened Christian conservative friends: Kill them all and let God sort them out.

But the fact is, NEVER in a million years would the world be able to rid itself of the Saudi-supported ISIS if no one ever challenged the ALL-MUSLIMS-ARE-EVIL myth. Because without the “evil” Iranians and the “evil” Assad, Syria would still be in the grip of ISIS, which, may I remind the reader, would not be there had it not been for wholehearted Western support for the Arab Spring and subsequent arms and support supplied to the “moderates” by US war enthusiasts. Needless to say, all of the moderates are Sunni Wahhabists.

Part of this challenge is NEVER to give credence to those who support the anti-Iran myths. Unfortunately, the myth is supported by BOTH sides of the aisle in Washington and by many intellectually lazy Americans, both conservative and liberal, who are waiting patiently under the table for the Washington Establishment to someday throw them a few scraps as long as they don’t meddle in the State Department’s meddling. ONLY Russia challenges this myth and fights alongside the Shiites in their war against the SUNNI terror supported clandestinely by the US and EU governments.

Ironically, US foreign policy today is in the hands of people who rail against political correctness, but these are precisely the ones who by their actions support the SUNNI radical Saudi Arabia while making the absolutely false and dangerous claim that IRAN is the biggest terror supporter. (So please, put aside your cheerleading role and don your watchdog hat).

Ask yourself: Are you REALLY politically incorrect or is your mind being controlled by a gigantic hoax even as you cheer on the ringleaders?

I recently sent the following commentary and link to a Sergey Lavrov speech to a small reader group:

The anti-Russian hysteria is so thick these days that even Russophiles are laying low. They’re waiting for the Trump administration to end so that they don’t have to join in the chorus of anti-Russian jeers just to prove they aren’t helping Putin hack their neighbor’s phone.

I have not seen any signs of sanity in the West for a while, but Russia is still behaving like the only adult in the room. Recently foreign minister Sergei Lavrov gave a speech which, if you are looking for signs of rational thinking on planet earth, is here for you to contemplate:

It is a bit longish so if you’re short on time, here are the highlights:

Paragraph 4 dicusses how Russophobes have long attacked Russia for “expansionism.” But here Lavrov discusses the addition of Siberia to the Russian empire and, without bluntly stating it, he is alluding to the way the Russians accepted the different cultures in that region, in contradistinction to the brutality of the Americans who treated their native peoples as if they were lower than animals, slaughtering them when they saw fit or forcing them onto reservations.

In about Par. 15, he mentions Kissinger and how he takes into account the cultural and historical factors in relations with other nations, while others in our State Department simply rely on fire power to persuade nations to come over to our side or else. This is certainly why Putin has maintained a cordial relationship with Kissinger all these years. Many Americans tend to dismiss Kissinger as simply another NWO stooge. We simply don’t like details and nuances and are paying dearly for our lack of attention to detail.

Par. 22 or thereabouts:

The historical, geopolitical, moral foundations that shape the foreign policy of Russia are solid and constant. They set the tone of our day-to-day diplomatic efforts which, in keeping with the Constitution, are guided directly by the President of the Russian Federation.

When was the last you heard any US pol talk about foundations such as these? They can’t. A “progressive” nation is not supposed to have any such foundations. We ignore our history, deny morality, and substitute ideology for geopolitics. Our answer to any geopolitical problems: carpet bombing. If it weren’t for US firepower, we would have no friends at all.

Par. 24 or therabouts: A big truth here that America refuses to see:

ONLY through an international coalition including Russia can the growing terror threat be combated. We are doing just the opposite, inventing Russian “hacking” and smearing anyone who dares to state the truth, and Europe is now cowering before Islamic terror. America is next. Oh, but we’re now obsessing over Iran, which has never contributed one penny to ISIS and is in fact fighting it in Syria. We’ve got all that fire power but where’s the gray matter?

Par. 26:

QUOTE: The formation of a polycentric international order is an objective process. It is in our common interest to make it more stable and predictable. In these conditions, the role of diplomacy as a tool to coordinate balanced solutions in politics, economics, finance, the environment, and the innovation and technology sectors has increased significantly. Simultaneously, the role of the armed forces as the guarantor of peace has increased too.

To US Neocons, the idea that nations OTHER than the “exceptional” US (which has all but destroyed the Middle East and wiped out its Christian population) might do a better job of leading is blasphemous to the Neocons/Neoliberals who have us all in a stranglehold. The problem for them is that, while they may own the media and government, what Lavrov says here makes plenty of sense to people in other countries, who are sick and tired of being under the heel of Washington and NATO. We may have the bombs, but we have lost the propaganda war.

I received a fair amount of blowback on this commentary. Example:

This Russian government media outlet [ http://russia-insider.com/…/incredible-speech-lavro…/ri19331 ] genuflects to Russian Foreign Secretary Lavrov, who mentions Henry Kissinger and how he supposedly took into account cultural and historical factors in interacting with other nations.

NOT QUITE: Putin and Lavrov have maintained a cordial relationship with Kissinger even though

1) Kissinger and Nixon were responsible for US bombing of Cambodia resulting in the murderous Khmer Rouge coming to power, which Kissinger and the U.S. then supported during the Killing Fields until ended by the Vietnamese army.

2) Kissinger supported the overthrow of democratically-elected Salvador Allende in Chili (9/11/1973) and the killing of thousands as military dictator Pinochet was taking power,

That is all true. The reason Putin and Lavrov are friends with Kissinger is not because of what he did in the past but because he does now take history and culture into account. What he did before or how many nations and lives he destroyed is beside the point for the eminently pragmatic Russia. What he is doing NOW is trying to avoid war (because he sees that his old sneaky method is a loser and has repented) and that is all Putin cares about. Because Putin is a winner, and you can’t let anything stand in the way of winning, not even emotions. In a nutshell, Putin understands the principle of repentance and utilizes it wisely.

NOTE: Putin is NOT a Westerner and does not behave like one. ONLY a tiny percentage of us will appreciate or understand this.

In the West, if a leader screws you, you hate him til one of you dies.

Not Putin. You don’t have to like this MO but it is Putin’s, it works, and you need to be aware of it.

Example: Around the start of the war in Syria, a Russian plane was shot down by the Turkish air force. Initially, Putin reprimanded and warned Turkey not to repeat this.

Erdogan did not even apologize at first. The Russian people were angry.

So Putin slapped meaningful sanctions on Turkey, notably the ban on Russians getting visas to Turkey. Russian tourists had poured significant wealth into Turkey. Now that was over. Worse, he suspended the potentially lucrative Turkish Stream pipeline project, another major economic loss for Turkey.

Erdogan felt the pain. Eventually, he apologized — REALLY a hard pill for a proud Turk to swallow!

Then a while later,as you will recall, a coup was planned in Turkey and Erdogan was targeted for removal for office. It is believed he was to be murdered.

Here is where Putin did the unexpected (if you are an average Westerner). Putin’s intel service informed him of the intended coup and Putin got on the horn and warned Erdogan. It is believed he told Erdogan that his Western partners (US and NATO) were behind the attempt. Erdogan had no trouble believing that after what the US had done to Ghadaffi, Mubarak and Yanukovich. Treachery is the name of the Washington game. The only reason any nation still deals with us is fear. Raw fear of our firepower. Not respect, not love, certainly not trust. But now the Russians are neck in neck with us in weaponry… And, er, their allies respect them.

Erdogan believed that Putin had saved his life and that was no doubt true. In so doing, Putin also gave Erdogan an object lesson in the treachery of his “allies.”

So now, as a result of the stinging treachery on the part of the allies and the loyalty of his Russian friend, Erdogan turned against the West, incl, recently, Germany, with which Erdogan is at cold war.

Meanwhile, what does one do when someone saves your life?

Of course, you treat them special, particularly if you have been unkind to them before this. Thus, Putin has persuaded Erdogan to let the US and Russia team up to provide safe haven for the Kurds in Syria, even though Erdogan hates the Kurds (Kurdish terror was a problem in turkey). Putin killed more than one bird with this stone. He managed to secure a cooperation agreement with the US, which has been snubbing him. He did so by manipulating NATO member Turkey, which is very important to US interests. It is give and take, at which Putin is an undisputed master.

As a result of this wise maneuvering, the Turkish Stream pipeline project is revived and Russian tourists are spending their money in Turkey again. The US is also forced to grudgingly admit that Putin helped keep Turkey at bay because that country has gotten way out of hand lately in its behavior toward the US and Germany.

If this is all too complicated for you and you can’t figure out what Putin is up to, don’t worry. Putin knows. He doesn’t need love, or understanding, or respect from Westerners. He’s getting plenty of those things elsewhere, where it counts.

His attitude toward Erdogan is a reflection of his attitude toward Kissinger.

No Western leader would have the motivation and the intelligence to turn an enemy into a friend the way Putin does on an almost routine basis. But consider who has the $20 trillion debt and who has almost no debt — and who goes around creating chaos that destroys nations like Libya, Syria and Kosovo while who respects the sovereignty of nations and does not meddle in their internal affairs? Since both have comparable arms at their disposal (if you consider that Russia is backed up by China), who will win?

BTW, while RT is a Russian government outlet, Russia Insider — where the Lavrov speech is featured — is owned by an American who lives in Moscow. It IS pro-Russian, however.

As for Kissinger “supposedly” taking culture and history into account, I think that is a matter of public record. Kissinger recently came out and warned the US about taunting the Russian bear. Yes, he did evil things when in office, but he has learned from his mistakes and is a whole lot smarter than any foreign service “specialist” in the US government today.

Departure of the first group of aerospace aircraft from the airbase Khmeimim to the points of permanent deployment in the territory of Russia

The aircraft is used primarily to destroy targets on the ground.

It carries a crew of two, and has a flight range of 4,500 km. The maximum air speed at sea level is1,400 km per hour. At an altitude of 11 thousand kilometers, the aircraft can accelerate to 1,900 km per hour. The maximum flight altitude is 17,000 m, and the maximum takeoff weight is 44.4 tonnes. [tonnes means metric tons—Don]

According to Jorgen Elving, a number of Su-34 planes are located in the Baltic region.

“The military unit there, according to available information, has 24 Su-34 planes. It is reported that by 2020, from 150 to 220 Su-34s will be supplied to the Russian air force and will replace the Su-24. Su-34s have been used in Syria,” says Jorgen Elving.

According to Jane’s Defense Weekly, Russia has at least eight Su-34 planes in Syria.

Below we will discuss one of the most modern landing assault ships in Russia.

Landing ships

Russia has several large landing ships of the 775 Minsk Class, ie, the Kaliningrad, the Korolev and the Alexander Shabalin.

The large landing ship (LLS) Kaliningrad in the military harbor of Baltiysk

The ships are armed with 57 mm artillery guns, one 76.2 mm battery and several antiaircraft missile units, two of which are 30 mm caliber.

A battalion of marines with combat vehicles can be loaded on the ship.

“These ships are quite old, but at the moment we are working on one new landing ship, the Ivan Gren, is under development, is now being tested and will be put into service by the Russian Navy later this year.” Initially, six such ships were to be built, but now it has been decided to hold it at only two, “- said Jorgen Elving.

Next is a Soviet-era submarine, which will soon be replaced by more submarines.

Non-nuclear submarines of the “Kilo” class

The crew of the Soviet “Kilo” class subs consists of 57 sailors and officers. The sub has a surface speed of 10 knots and subbmerged speed of 17 knots. On average, the submarine can dive to 240 meters. “Kilo” class subs can remain submerged for up to 45 days. Armament consists of six torpedo tubes, and up to 18 torpedoes or 24 mines can be taken on board.

Russia has two non-nuclear submarines of the Kilo class in the Baltic Sea – Vyborg and Dmitrov. The latter is currently docked, according to Jorgen Elving.

Now we come to the submarine used in the Barents Sea.

The “Borey” class – Russia’s new supersubs

The “Borey” is a nuclear submarine intended to replace the famous submarine of the Akula design, the largest ever created. The “Borey” is much smaller than its predecessor, but it is more difficult to detect, and it is much more maneuverable. Submerged, this submarine can travel at a speed of 30 knots, while its surface speed is 15 knots. The Borey has an OK-650 nuclear reactor, the same type used in Soviet submarines since the early 1980s. It carries a crew of 107 sailors and officers, and can dive to about 450 meters.

The submarine “Vladimir Monomakh” has arrived at its permanent base on Kamchatka

The sub, 170 meters in length, is equipped with ballistic missiles that can carry both tactical and strategic nuclear warheads. It is equipped with 12-meter missiles of the RSM-56 Bulava type. Reportedly, problems were encountered during the tests with the “Bulava.” For example, they exploded in the water when fired in the submerged position. The theoretical range of the missiles is 8,000 km, and the accuracy radius is 350 meters.

In addition, the “Borey” class is equipped with Vyuga (blizzard) missiles, which protect it from enemy submarines and surface ships. They can be loaded with a non-atomic explosive or carry small tactical nuclear warheads. In addition, the “Borey” has many smart torpedoes.

Since the submarine uses an atomic engine, its service time is unlimited, which theoretically means that the Borey can stay on the job for many years.

The Russian fleet ordered ten submarines of the Borey class. Three of these are currently in service.

Due to its size, the Borey is primarily adapted to work in the open sea and is not intended for the Baltic region, where it could run aground because of the relatively shallow depth.